John Rafferty

[Budget Implementation Act, 2009, February 11th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, I would like to begin with a quote:

There was a time in this fair land when the railroad did not run

When the wild majestic mountains stood alone against the sun

Long before the white man and long before the wheel

When the green dark forest was too silent to be real.

I thank Gordon Lightfoot for those words.

For some members in the House who are city dwellers, they may not know that that kind of wild Canadian land still exists in this country. In my part of Canada, in northwestern Ontario for centuries the waterways were how the fur traders got around. In 1803, people in Fort Frances, named after Lady Frances, were trading using the waterways. Now in this budget implementation bill our free and I would say ancient responsibilities to our navigable waterways are going to disappear.

Amendments will be made to the Navigable Waters Protection Act to streamline approval processes, the government says, to give more authority to the minister to allow construction without further environmental assessments. It will exclude work on certain classes of navigable waters from the approval process.

The act was first implemented in 1882 and there is no doubt that it needs a little modernization, but--

[Budget Implementation Act, 2009, February 11th, 2009]

Madam Speaker, aside from the environmental impact of changes to the Navigable Waters Protection Act, there is also a situation here. This is a question I have for the hon. member. That act was originally enacted in 1882. It is one of Canada's oldest pieces of legislation. There is no doubt that it needs a little modernization.

In the name of cutting red tape, to speed up the building of infrastructure projects and stimulate the economy, the government is introducing changes that will remove navigable status from thousands of waterways in Canada. It is one of the things that is not talked about that much. It is not a monetary item in the budget. I wonder if the hon. member would have a comment to make on that.

[BUDGET IMPLEMENTATION ACT, 2009, February 10th, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I have been listening for the last couple of weeks to Liberal members standing in the House and railing against the budget. Quite frankly, I have to tell them that I am getting emails and phone calls from people in my riding saying that the Liberals and the Liberal Party in their stance are becoming a bit of a laughing stock. I would like to ask the hon. member, why does she and the other Liberal members continue to storm the barricades and ask for reports?

[Employment Insurance, February 3rd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, that reply is another insult to families right across Canada.

The Tembec shutdown is just the latest victim of the government's refusal to take action. Nearly 200 mills have closed on the Conservatives' watch alone.

Canadians in forestry towns need support not so they can stay at home, but so they can keep their homes.

The market needed a kickstart, mills needed better credit, workers needed EI and communities needed infrastructure support without handcuffs. The budget failed on all fronts. Now some government members are laughing.

Why is the government turning its back on forest companies in Canada?

[Employment Insurance, February 3rd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, after insulting thousands of hard-working Canadians, yesterday the Minister of Human Resources delivered another slap in the face suggesting that the unemployed simply are not looking hard enough for work.

What does the minister now say to the 1,500 workers who lost their jobs this morning when Tembec announced more closures; British Columbians in Canal Flats, Elko, Cranbrook, Skookumchuk and Chetwynd, Manitobans in Pine Falls, and Ontarians in Hearst who will all lose their jobs?

Will the minister stop insulting workers and start supporting them?

[Canada-EFTA Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, February 2nd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I certainly appreciate the member's comments and certainly the minister's comments just before that. I invite him to come to Thunder Bay to see our shipbuilding facilities where not one ship is being built at this moment and not one ship was built last year. I invite him to come and I will personally show him around. The government mentioned that extending tariffs for some vessels for up to 15 years was an important part of EFTA. Without any other measures, is this not simply a stay of execution for the shipbuilding industry?

[Canada-EFTA Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, February 2nd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, the member from Sackville—Eastern Shore spoke very eloquently. I think I meant to say yes and not no to his question. I am not sure exactly what his question was, but I think I meant to say yes. That is why, I guess, we do not get any simple answers in the House.

Part of the problem is the fact that many members in the House do not think of shipbuilding as a major industry in our country. It is a major industry and it could be a much more major industry and employ tens of thousands more Canadians.

[Canada-EFTA Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, February 2nd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I have been here for a number of months now. We do not always expect answers, particularly when the question only requires a yes or no answer. In this case it is easy to do: no is the answer.

[Canada-EFTA Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, February 2nd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I will give the member a good example of capacity.

Last week the last fine paper mill in Ontario went into receivership. Fine paper is the paper we use every day, the paper we have on our desks and the paper we put in our computers. The last fine paper mill in Ontario is now gone. At the same time, as that one disappeared from Ontario, one opened up in New York. The irony is that the major investors in the New York operation are Canadians. Why did they not invest in our own?

The Conservative government, and in that particular case the Ontario government, is putting those of us in northern Ontario back into the dark ages, where we are hewers of wood and drawers of water. Anything that requires finishing is leaving our province and our country.

Perhaps we will still have one mill operating in Ontario that will supply pulp, but that pulp will not be processed into finished goods here. It will go to the United States to make fine papers. That is where all the high quality, highly skilled and highly paid jobs are in much more abundance.

Are we going to go back to a situation in our country where all we are is a source for primary resources and nothing else? I beg the government to truly consider what is happening.

[Canada-EFTA Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, February 2nd, 2009]

Mr. Speaker, I cannot speak for the government side and say whether they are ashamed of the bill. I suspect they probably are.

However, just as the hon. member for Sackville—Eastern Shore has said, there are some things in EFTA that are worthwhile, and we do not have any objections to that. What we are asking is that shipbuilding be excluded from the bill before it goes forward. It just a simple request. It has nothing to do with many of the other trade parts of the agreement.

I have seen the devastation in Thunder Bay over the years as shipbuilding has declined. As I said, it is very difficult to understand why, when we have a shipbuilding capacity in a city like Thunder Bay that has been hard hit in other areas, such as forestry, because of ill-advised agreements and a lack of caring by various levels of government. It is difficult for me to stay clear eyed as I speak when I know about families that have been devastated and people who have lost their jobs and probably some peripheral things, such as the loss of skilled labour. When that kind of thing happens, skilled labour leaves the area, the region and the province. We cannot afford to have any more out-migrations.

I hope the government will have a look at this, consider the shipbuilding element of this and decide that what we have talked about today is the right way to go.